Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cousances (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) — DaxServer (t · m · c) 22:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Cousances
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Potentially NN. Lacks all WP:RS. Brought to my attention via Teahouse. UtherSRG (talk) 14:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. UtherSRG (talk) 14:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Cousances is the progeniter of Le Creuset and of enameled cast iron cookware. It is hundreds of years old.  This is one of the most unencyclopedic sniping trips I have had the dismay of witnessing on Wikipedia. I will add the sources this weekend, i.e. by the end of Sunday, November 6, 2022.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  15:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Wait until the Fowler finds the sources
 * Roostery123 (talk) 17:06, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm done for now. I haven't removed the uncited sections after the lead, but they should probably be removed. But the lead is now impeccably cited, in my view. Note the last reference for the fireback is peer-reviewed, even though it doesn't have a hard copy publisher.  The Durham University site in the book's url states that.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  23:14, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I've left generous quotes, especially of books such as Elizabeth David's Cooking with Le Creuset and Cousances, which is hard to find anywhere. Perhaps they could be used for expanding the article a little or correcting my paraphrasing. But please don't remove them. Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  23:18, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 19:18, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Like I strongly suspect this subject is indeed notable, as it has been collectible for decades. Sources likely exist but may not be readily available online. Valereee (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.